Hsi-chu Bolick reported on the draft of the
revised questionnaire which had previously been circulated to Executive
Committee members electronically. The revised draft attempts to bring the CEAL
survey into line with the categories used by ARL in order to facilitate
comparison. The main differences compared with the previous format of the survey
are: questionnaire rather than table format; an instructions section which
follows ARL definitions; a more detailed breakdown of budget. It was argued that
this more comprehensive survey should be more flexible in reflecting the
differing natures of various libraries. The use of footnotes will make it
possible to show how collections differ.

The problem was raised that salary statements are
too revealing for small collections. Hsi-chu replied that there would be
flexibility not to report or to put "N/A". The problem of dividing up
personnel and budget into C,J, and K categories was raised. It was urged that
respondents should provide estimates when exact figures are not available. It
was suggested that a 4th (comprehensive) "CJK" category could be added
to the individual C,J,K categories.

Library collections need to be given time to
collect data in the new categories. The possibility of implementing the new
format in 1998/99 was suggested.

ACTION: To continue discussion by e-mail. The CEAL
Executive Committee will review the draft further and then consider sending it
out to the membership for further comments.

2. Eastlib listserv.

Hsi-chu Bolick was thanked for her work on the
Eastlib listserv. It was agreed that it should be emphasized more that Eastlib
is the official CEAL listserv and as such, a form of CEAL publishing activity.

The President will represent CEAL at the workshop
"Area Librarians in Higher Education:Defining the Future", to be held
in Indiana University in July. CEAL was not officially represented at the
previous "Future of Area Librarianship" conference held in 1995. The
decision on representation and liaison with CC:AAM is to keep the status quo,
i.e. no formal designated liaison person. It was agreed that the main point is
that there should continue to be communication between CEAL and CC:AAM on
matters of mutual interest.

5. Expenses

The Treasurer will attempt to get a contribution
from AAS to Matthew Ciolek's travel expenses because of his participation in an
AAS roundtable on electronic resources.

6. Fellowship Dinner

Advance information on the fellowship dinner
should be sent to organizations such as book vendors to enable them to attend.
It was agreed that vendors can become institutional (subscription paying but non
voting) members of CEAL.

7. Pinyin Conversion Task Force

a. Mandate. It was felt that the mandate should be
broad at this time, along the lines of: "to investigate the feasibility,
the short-term and long-term ramifications, and a timetable for implementation
for a conversion to Pinyin romanization" as well as "to consult with
the East Asia library community". A time schedule was discussed. It was
agreed that the Task Force should provide a definitive report by the time of the
next AAS/CEAL meeting. Philip Melzer mentioned that LC would like to have a
meeting with representatives from OCLC, RLG and our Task Force during or before
the summer ALA meeting. The Task Force's schedule will be tentative upon the
outcome of that meeting.

The Secretary was asked to write a draft charge to
be used as a basis for further discussion.

b. Membership. It was agreed that the Task Force
should not have a membership of more than 10 people. This could include: i.
Representatives appointed by the following CEAL committees: Chinese Materials,
Public Services, Technical Processing, Library Technology. Each committee should
nominate a representative who need not be a current member of the committee. ii.
Faculty representation: the AAS China and Inner Asia Council will be asked to
designate a person. iii. Representatives of the RLG and OCLC CJK user groups. As
no agreement could be reached immediately on whether or not these should be
included, the President will poll Executive committee members by e-mail on this
issue. iv. The CEAL President v. 2 or 3 "at large" CEAL members. How
to select these was not decided.

It was agreed that the Task Force should elect its
own Chair. Philip Melzer pointed out that the Chair will need to be elected in
time to be able to attend the joint meeting of LC, RLG and OCLC which will
probably take place just before the ALA conference at the end of June.

It was agreed that there should be an
INSTITUTIONAL vote on the Task Force report.

8. Committee reports

Committee Chairs were asked to write reports on
their meetings for publication in the next issue of JEAL. These should be sent
to Gail King by the end of April.